Packers getting stomped

Only 10-0 after the 1st quarter but the Packers are getting
totally dominated at the “new” Lambeau. ZERO defense.
Can’t stop the run and can’t stop the pass. Minnesota’s
doing it with a lot of smoke & mirrors but the Packers
look horrible.

The Packers offense has *TWO* yards of offense in the first
quarter. One INT by Favre and a fumble by Green.

Mombu 2012-04-10 06:15:06

Stupid question: What exactly got renovated at Lambeau? Looks like the
same crib to me!

Wolfie 2012-04-10 06:15:13

Added a new upper-level, facade, and atrium.

Culpepper gave up the ball on a stupid fumble (no big
surprise there) and the Packers have moved into FG
position (with a PI call.)

Mombu 2012-04-10 06:15:15

We shall make sustinence out of your testicles, you and silly Kanigits!!!!

*reference to Culpepper’s alma mater*

Bb 2012-04-10 06:15:18

Thanks for the update. I’m trapped at work and can’t seem to get any
info on that game. I’m going to make a break for it to find a sports
bar to see the vikes/pack for myself at halftime. Hopefully the pack
won’t make a miraculous comeback. bb

Rsgibson 2012-04-10 06:15:21

Sun, 7 Sep 2003 17:53:47 UTC, “Wolfie” Noted:

I’m not surprised in a sense. GB hasn’t added a top player on either
side of the ball in years. I don’t know the exact details but their
drafts have bad too as I don’t hear of any new players making news.

They gotten old and mediocre and are now paying the price.

The lambs are getting hammered too. Warner has put the ball on the turf
when points were on the line twice, causing a potential score swing of
14.

Todd stephens 2012-04-13 06:42:20

The fabulous Warner and the Rams are doing about the same. I think Warner has
fumbled like 3 times already in the first half, one he lost for a TD.

—
Todd Stephens

for email, emulate St. Patrick in the land of Jose Gaspar

Wolfie 2012-04-13 06:42:23

I think the Packers offense will come back (Favre’s 3-8-7-0-1
right now and that won’t last but the way their defense is
playing it won’t make a difference. The Vikings are down
near FG range again already.

Wolfie 2012-04-13 06:42:26

17-3 now, Vikings. The Packer defense is just horrid. I don’t
expect their offense to keep playing this poorly, though. But
Favre’s gonna start feeling the pressure and either start making
plays or throwing wild. They look REALLY bad against a
Vikings team that’s 500 at best, IMO.

Pablo 2012-04-13 06:42:28

I think the Pack is a average team at best. The only reason they might make
the
playoffs is because they play in the worst division in football. H*** they
might not even do that.

Rsgibson 2012-04-13 06:42:30

Sun, 7 Sep 2003 18:11:30 UTC, “Wolfie” Noted:

And they got another TD making the vikes look like giant killers 🙂

Rsgibson 2012-04-13 06:42:39

Sun, 7 Sep 2003 18:16:40 UTC, “Wolfie” Noted:

You know what is so odd about this is that division fell completely
apart the year we leave it.

It will have to be Favre as I don’t see Sherman coaching them out of
holes like that. He must have one of the easiest coaching jobs around.
All he does is pat Brett on the b*** and say, “Go get me some points”.

If the vikes get another score before GB can score they might as well
roll out the fat lady.

Wolfie 2012-04-13 06:42:44

Favre’s just not a good QB when he’s down by 10 or more.
Just threw an INT (with a 70+ yard return) in the end zone
without a Packer *anywhere* near the ball. It’s 20-3 at
the half and Favre is 9-16-67-0-3 for a QBR of 26.82.

We’ll have to see how they come out in the second half.
Favre’s capable of leading them back from 17 down
against the Vikings defense. But the Pack defense is
going to have to wakeup to give them a chance. Looks
like the “new” Lambeau is going to be broken in the same
way the “old” Lambeau went out — with a Packer blowout
loss.

Rsgibson 2012-04-13 06:42:47

Sun, 7 Sep 2003 18:40:52 UTC, “Wolfie” Noted:

I just saw the talking heads on FOX put an exclamation point next to
the Vikes D! Now that’s a switch.

Wolfie 2012-04-13 06:42:52

They haven’t been watching the game. It’s more Green Bay
being bad than the Vikings looking good. None of the INTs
Favre has thrown were the result of good coverage, for
instance: one he threw well (and low) and the receiver knocked
it up into the air, one was to the defender without a receiver
in the area, and one was thrown to a receiver who tripped
over his own feet. They’re getting very little pressure and
what they do get is coming off of delayed blitzes.

Rsgibson 2012-04-13 06:42:55

Sun, 7 Sep 2003 19:10:09 UTC, “Wolfie” Noted:

Looking at the stats on NFL’s site has GB with a total net yards of 14
and up now 27-3 with 7:35 left in the third.

They must be jumping out of windows in Wisconsin 🙂

But you know what for the vikes catching an INT thrown right to them is
an improvement they’ve been so bad.

Wolfie 2012-04-13 06:43:01

No idea what stats you’re looking at, then. GB had about
100 yards in the first half.

Yeah, but they don’t get hurt since they’re all one-story buildings….

That’s true… ;p

Rsgibson 2012-04-13 06:43:03

Sun, 7 Sep 2003 19:32:19 UTC, “Wolfie” Noted:

Sometimes the site has problems. They often don’t update the stats for
a long time. I thought it looked awfully odd. Those were what they had
for them at the end of the first half and well through the third
quarter.

They just updated it and suddenly GB had about 150 yards. I thought
that was too much for a few minutes even if it was the vikes 🙂

Flycoon 2012-04-13 06:43:34

Mostly, they are ice fishing sheds. On warmer day, one of the Blatz
drinking fried cheese curd dipped in ranch dressing with bacon bits eating
fat slobs could break through the ice and drown. If they could fit through the window.